Tolerating women who can't think beyond what they have been told that they want still gets you one who can't see any fundamental differences between men and women, and I am a Taken In Hand man who is no longer willing to deal with any amount of "radical feminist rhetoric".

Feminists who try to dictate how to interpret their behaviour "correctly" seem unwilling to accept that men get to choose what they think of it, and some of us have decided that such females are fundamentally defective and not worth the trouble.

One difference between men and women is that what women find attractive in men isn't what men find attractive in women. And while feminine women can also be extremely resilient and wonderfully Taken In Hand, no amount of whining will ever make something attractive out of females who imitate masculine behaviours or roles, or act as competitors instead of helpmates.

A woman's (or a man's) soul and character, not to mention her attractiveness, go way beyond the words she mouths. Embittered men sometimes blame feminism or other cultural distractions for their lack of success with real women.

People are imperfect and their ideas change rapidly. Character, however, is much more enduring. There is a very large selection of wonderful women with taken-in-hand proclivities, just waiting for single men to don their own confidence and character and take them in hand regardless of any shrill platitudes they may make to the contrary.

My wife is thoroughly intellectual, thoroughly beautiful, thoroughly feminine and completely obedient. She is the sweetest woman alive and serves me in every way that I desire. If that would not be enough for you then what you want is not of this world.

My job and my desire is to provide for her wants, needs, and desires. And she deserves that and more. If our preferences are mutually contradictory, hers take priority over mine unless I think that enacting her preferences will hurt her, and then I will not allow her to act on them.

We both love making the other smile. She makes me smile quite a lot. If you could see her in action, you would know why I love her so much. Since we both want the other to be happy, there is usually not much conflict. Her intelligence, education, and brilliance add to the richness of our lives. She has excellent ideas.

And I certainly take into account her ideas in my decision making. I utilize my best and imperfect judgement in determining what we will do, even if I disagree with my wife. Sometimes my wife wants to please me in a way that I think will require too much sacrifice on her part. I will not allow that.

In exchange for placing her needs above my own, I demand (and am blessed with) her obedience in return.

But perhaps what you might need to know is that when we first knew each other, before we got married, my wife initially found it difficult to trust me and surrender, and she was not obedient, though she did want to be. I knew that she needed to be conquered and brought to full obedience. I did not expect her to obey from the get go, and I did not complain (much - it did sometimes get annoying in those early days before we were married) that she was such a handful, I simply handled her. She thrived on being forced to obey. I believe this is true of most Taken In Hand women. What men need to know is that such women want to be brought to full obedience, and though it may take months or even a year or more, you will get there: she will become willingly obedient when trust has been built up.

I believe it's unrealistic to expect full obedience without the full commitment of marriage. Unmarried women need to protect themselves until they have a husband to do so for them. This is a natural feminine need, not a blameworthy fault, and my wife was no different. It took some time for her to relax and allow herself to be fully controlled by me. But when we got married, my wife's trust and surrender grew rapidly and within a year or less, probably much less, she had become fully obedient.

>... if I did not agree that men are no different
> mentally, physiologically, or sexually from women ...
> When I complained about this to a lifelong friend

I infer from your statements that you think that women are substantially different from men.

Of course I agree that men and women are different. They have different genetic makeup. And they grow up under different conditions, partially because social expectations concerning men and women are different, and partially because having a vagina and uterus rather than penis and testicles makes their experience of their bodies quite different.

But different men or different women also have different genetic makeup; in fact any two individuals who are not identical twins are genetically different. And there are no two individuals, including identical twins, who have exactly the same life experience. Our own life experience tells us just how immensely different people of the same sex can be.

Probably you did not mean that men and women, or any individuals for that matter, are different in this rather obvious sense. Probably you meant that in certain sense men are rather alike while being quite different from women who also are rather alike in that sense, and that this difference is the reason why in the intimate relationships with women men should be in charge. Is my perception of what did you mean correct? Further I'll suppose that it is.

> He said that some women both say they want an
> egalitarian relationship and act as though they do. He
> told me not to go out with those women because there
> would be no compatibility.

As far as I understand if you call your friend's advice "very sage" it means that you agree with what he said. But this means that not all women are inclined to accept masculine authority. In my opinion this contradicts your supposition that men are different from women in a way that enables (and in fact invites) them to assume the lead, unless of course you adhere to the view that a man should be the leader no matter what his woman thinks about it.

I agree that women who say they want an egalitarian relationship and act as though they do are rare. But they do exist. You may be incompatible with them, some men may even find them unattractive and unfeminine, but they are still there, so any view that aspires to say something true about men and women in general has to take them into account. Your view seems to ignore them despite the fact that you agree with your friend who said that such women exist.

So if you have a relationship where both of you agree that you have to be the leader, why do you need to make sweeping statements about men and women in general, especially if you know that such statements are not universally true? Do you need some justification, some excuse? Is not consent of your woman enough?

It is surprisingly common that men who have this consent don't feel it is enough, so they contrive different theories that postulate that men and women are fundamentally different. Of course, it is a common human need to explain things they see, especially things they find to be strange or paradoxical. But you just may ask your woman why she wants what she wants. It's possible that if you are sensitive, insightful and persistent enough, you'll be able to get the truthful answer and understand it. I think that men and women are not so different that they can't understand motives of each other. And I suspect that this truthful answer, whatever it will be, will surprise you both.

I think that if you perceive some attitudes and behaviours of you woman (and indeed, of many women) as strange and paradoxical from your point of view, it is rather bad idea to postulate the existence of fundamental differences between men and women and consider the matter settled. Such theories are just a fig leaf used to conceal and suppress your astonishment. But being astonished is a good thing, it makes you think and ask questions. And if you think and ask questions you'll understand your woman better.

A poster wrote:

"You speak wonderfully of your wife, David. How though does a highly intellectual woman serve a man with complete obedience? Seriously, how does she get her own needs met? I'd like to be more this way but don't understand how obedience fits in today's world."

One of my needs is to be controlled by my husband, so obedience itself meets a need of mine. If you don't have that need, obedience will not be right for you. It only fits in today's world to the extent that it's right for you. You also need a husband that is a good guy that wants to make you happy, not a guy who's focussed only on himself and his own desires.

David's Wife

I am as saddened as the next man when hearing feminist rhetoric about the evil of men. However, I take exception to what looks like a dismissal of feminist concerns or portraying men to be more “ethical” or more right or more capable just because of their gender.

We do indeed live in a patriarchal culture and I see no point in arguing that fact. Male values, hierarchical and process-oriented approaches are revered in business and society. Women, bless them, so flexible and adaptable, have managed to not only succeed in our male-oriented culture, but even excel in it. They are a force to be reckoned with, to be respected if not feared, and we men have a choice to make: make allies of them or enemies. Personally, I would much rather have a woman at my side than to face her in battle.

[For the rest of this post, see How to understand and appreciate a woman. - The Editor]

The word feminism is often misused. For most of us it simply means women having equal rights under the law something they often do not have on this planet even in 2008, rights to vote, own property, become surgeons or presidents and a reasonable measure of fairness at home.

I think David said watch their behaviour. That's the key. How they behave, not necessarily what they say. Women like me react in a certain way to dominant men, always. It's how we're made. Some other women aren't made like that and if you're a dominant man you're wasting your time with those ones.

"She thrived on being forced to obey. I believe this is true of most Taken In Hand women. What men need to know is that such women want to be brought to full obedience, and though it may take months or even a year or more, you will get there: she will become willingly obedient when trust has been built up."

Mmmm, yes and you are right trust needs to be built up. Occasionally dominant men are surprised I won't trust immediately. Why should I? I say do you really want someone as stupid as to trust someone she hardly knows? Aren't you lucky that I don't.

Libby, I stem from Vikings, the ancient conquerors of the North.

Drakkar longships and snake-chiseled rune stones my heritage, I shy away from battle for the walk of the berserk leaves only ashes in its wake.

Women and men are petrifying at war, but when juxtaposed in love and contrasted in lust, they are magnificent. After all, we belong together, not apart.

Dreamwalker